Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1887-12-16
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
Bondsmen Held for IA Corinth VCoIIector's
.Delinquencies to the A mount of 10000.


The Supreme court, by Judge Powers,
has Just rendered judgment in two cases
OF more general interest and greater pecu-
mary Importance than any in Orange
county since the famous highway damage
bill Of Ira b. Melendy against the town of
Bradford These are the two suits of the
town of Corinth against A. NJ. Carpenter
and others, being actions of debt on bond
against former collector of taxes of Cor
NTH aud his bondsmen for delnquencies
in collecting and paying over on the tax
bills OF 1919 and 1850 The writ in the 1879
case was entered at December term in
1850 aud after several coutinuauces d
judgment by nil deceit as the LAWYERS say,
was rendered thereon at the December
term, 1852. At the June term, 1Ss3, suit
was brought on the 1850 bond and the
defendant bOndsmen having meanwhile
brought a bill in chancery enioiuing the
after answer being made and hearing
thereon, agreed that both suits at law
should stand referred to Samuel NJ. flea
son OF ThetfOrd as of the June term, 1888,
the first cause being referred for the as
SeSsmeut of damages under an agreement
of the parties and Il rule of the court that
the judgment already obtained should
prtmd Jdcie entitle the plaintiff to nom
nal damages only, the second cause being
referred generally. The hearing before
the referee began in November, 1888, and
was continued from time to time con-
Stunning more than fortnight, but at the
June term, 1885, the reports were filed
finding the facts in favor of the plaintiff
III both suits, it having previously been
further agreed between the parties that
the referee should have full chancery pow
ers to adjust all the equities as between the
tf,tt a. Il .niI hnp it,a e 4
suits aud between the bondsmen them
selves in said suits and that said cases
should be heard together. On the coming
in OF the reports hearing thereon was
had before Judge ROwell in the County
! Court and he recommitted both reports
| for further findings on six special inter
| rogaiorieS. Another hearing was then
had before the referee at Bradford, the
others having been in Corinth, and at
| December term, 1885, additional reports
still more, if possible, in favor of the
| plaintiff were filed. At that term, how
ever Judge Rowell in the 1919 bond suit
| rendered judgment for nominal damages
only and nominal costs, thus virtually de-
teatlng the plaintiff and in the 1850 bond
suit for what the plaintiff claimed. Both
! parties took exceptions, the plaintiff to the
! former judgment aud the defendants to
the latter. AT the March term, 1856, of
! the Supreme Court the cases were entered
and continued till the general term, 1856,
when they We're argued and held with the
court but ordered for reargument at the
general term, 1887. The judgment Just
announced reverses the County Court
| judgment in the 1879 suit, and sustains
that in the 1880 suit except on an item OF
interest. Both judgments against the de-
PENDANTS amount to nearly $4,000. The
counsel employed for the town were J. X
Darling, h. NJ. Harvey and George H.
Stow for the defendants, S. b. Heb ard
John II. Watson and A. p Hunton.